Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Efficiency of class II division 1 and class II division 2 treatment in relation to different treatment approaches

2003; Elsevier BV; Volume: 9; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1053/sodo.2003.34028

1558-4631

Julia von Bremen, Hans Pancherz,

Dental Health and Care Utilization

The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency of Class II Division 1 and Class II Division 2 treatment comparing different treatment approaches (conventional and Herbst). Treatment efficiency was defined as a better result in a shorter treatment time. One hundred forty-two patients aged 10 to 15 years treated in the late mixed and permanent dentition were examined. The conventional treatment approach used at the University of Giessen (removable and multibracket appliance) was used in 98 subjects (75 Class II Division 1 and 23 Class II Division 2). The Herbst approach (Herbst appliance followed by a multibracket appliance) was used in 44 subjects (30 Class II Division 1 and 14 Class II Division 2). Pre- and posttreatment dental casts were evaluated using the PAR Index. Active treatment duration was recorded. Subjects treated with the Herbst approach had a shorter treatment duration (Class 11 Division 1 = 21.0 months, Class 11:2 = 30.4 months) than those treated with the Conventional approach (Class II Division 1 = 32.1 months, Class 11:2 = 38.3 months). The PAR Score reduction (= improvement) was larger in subjects treated with the Herbst approach (Class II Division 1 = 76%, Class 11:2 = 76%) than in subjects treated with the Conventional approach (Class II Division 1 = 68%, Class II Division 2 = 65%). It was concluded that both treatment of Class II Division 1 and Class II Division 2 malocclusions was more efficient using the Herbst approach than using the conventional approach.